Marco Polo: A sample return mission to a primitive NEO
Session IX: Sample Return Challenges
David Agnolon ESA-ESTEC, Directorate of Science & Robotic Exploration Email: [email protected]
P. Coste, R. Drai, D. Escorial, P. Falkner, L. Ferracina, D. Koschny, H. Ritter, J. Romstedt (ESA-ESTEC) M. Khan (ESA-ESOC) A. Barucci (Observatory Of Paris)
6th International Planetary Probe Workshop ; 21-06-2008 1 Outline
Cosmic-Vision context Marco Polo science requirements Scope of the CDF study NEO target selection and baseline mission profile Sampling strategy, sample acquisition and transfer system Orbiting, descent and landing on a NEO High-speed Earth re-entry Overall spacecraft design Technology development approach
6th International Planetary Probe Workshop ; 21-06-2008 2 ESA Cosmic-Vision
Future of the ESA Scientific programme 2017-202X Cosmic Vision Call for Proposals in April 2007 for: • 1 “medium M” class mission for launch in 2017 • 1 “large L” class mission for launch in 2018
50 proposals receivedNEO Sample return mission Æ 9 proposals selected (i.e. 7 missions) by ESA advisory structures assessment phaseEuropean for 1st cycle Japanese of Cosmic-Vision team (950 M€ budget) Cross-Scale Lead proposers: Spica • A. Barucci (LESIA, Paris Euclid Laplace Observatory) Marco Polo Tandem • M. Yoshikawa (JSPEC/JAXA) Plato XEUS
Down selection of 2 M missions to enter definition phase ~ mid-2009 Final M mission selected in 2011 for implementation
6th International Planetary Probe Workshop ; 21-06-2008 3 Requirements and payload
Defined by US, European and Japanese scientists Go to a D, T, C or B type NEO (most primitive) Return > 30 g sample (goal 100 g) Place sample in their global/local context Provide complementary info not available from the samples Multiple sampling locations (non-uniform composition) Maximum sample temperature: + 40oC (organics) Sample composition (cm-sized pebbles + small particles)
Avoid contamination of the Spatial resolution Spatial Spatial sample for imaging in the resolution for resolution for visual VIS/IR mid-IR Instruments: wide & narrow spectrometer instrument angle camera, Vis-NIR & Global Order of dm Order of m Order of mid-IR spectrometer, laser characterisation 10 m altimeter, neutral particle Local x 5 Order of mm Order of dm Order of dm characterisation analyzer, radio science Context Tens of μm - - experiment measurements
6th International Planetary Probe Workshop ; 21-06-2008 4 Scope of the ESA CDF Study
Internal ESA pre-assessment study (similar to NASA JPL Team X) Objectives: • Critical assessment of initial Marco Polo proposal • Establish a feasible & cost-efficient mission profile option
• Fulfil science objectives & requirements
• Feed forward upcoming industry studies
• Help define required technology development
Discussions with JAXA ongoing
Æ As a starting point CDF study focuses on European expertise : NOT meant to be representative of selected Phase A scenario M-mission Cosmic-Vision technology constraints: • No major development can be undertaken until definition phase unless strong generic interest • TRL 5/6 by 2011 Æ build on ongoing development and off-the-shelf equipment
6th International Planetary Probe Workshop ; 21-06-2008 5 NEO selection D (km) Provisional q assumes Preliminary global screening designation Number Type (AU) Q (AU) i (deg) HV p=0.06 Prot (hrs) 1989 UQ 65679 C 0.67 1.16 1.3 19.28 0.76 7.733 (> 5000 known NEO!) 1999 JU3 162173 Cg 0.96 1.42 5.9 19.2 0.78 7.5 2001 SK162 162998 T 1.01 2.84 1.7 17.77 1.52 68 Global optimization algorithms 2001 SG286 D 0.89 1.83 7.8 20.93 0.35 ? 1999 RQ36 101955 B or C1 0.9 1.36 6 20.81 0.37 2.146 run over ~ 15 targets based on 1996 FG3 C 0.69 1.42 2 18.22 1.23 3.5942 2001 AE2 NEW138911 T 1.24TARGET 1.46 1.66 19 0.86 ? specific optimization criteria 2001 FC7 68278 Cg1 1.27 1.6 2.6 18.17 1.26 ? 1977 VA 136564 C or Xc1 1.13 2.6 3 19.06 0.84 ? More in-depth mission analysis + 1998 KU2 152679PROPOSALS Cb 1.01 3.5 4.9 16.47 2.76 ? 1960 UA = design iterations for 4 targets Anza 2061 TCG 1.05 3.48 3.8 16.56 2.65 5.75, 11.5 1979 VA = Wilson- WELCOMEDormant !!! Harrington 4015 comet 0.99 4.28 2.8 15.99 3.44 3.56, 6.1 1991 DB 14402 C 1.03 2.41 11.4 18.4 1.13 2.266 2000 RW37 162567 C 0.94 1.56 13.7 19.74 0.61 ? V1 +Δ 2× Δ 2 + ΔVV i 1998 UT18 85774 C 0.94 1.87 13.6 19.07 0.83 34 1 To be confirmed by observations
ΔV2
ΔV1 NEO LAUNCH CRUISE ARRIVAL SCI DEPARTURE CRUISE ENTRY TOTAL name escape V-inf dec swb1 swb2 swb3 date kg yea date swb date V-ent kg m/s years 19/11/30 4.000 -10 20/12/04 22/01/20 1550 1.5 23/07/18 24/12/03 12.13 1303 2665 5.0 1999 JU3 17/12/28 3.466 10 20/08/17 20/12/05 22/04/28 1759 1.2 23/07/18 24/12/04 12.13 1471 2288 6.9 18/08/27 3.394 -45 19/02/13 20/12/10 23/03/07 1294 0.8 23/12/06 26/01/08 12.75 1188 2951 7.4 2001 SK162 17/08/25 3.396 0 18/08/25 19/02/12 20/12/09 23/04/04 1444 0.7 23/12/06 26/01/08 12.75 1324 2615 8.4 18/09/19 3.490 -30 19/03/05 20/12/07 1610 1.7 22/08/04 23/06/24 23/11/16 11.83 1366 2517 5.2 1989 UQ 17/09/20 3.492 0 18/09/20 19/03/05 20/12/20 1702 1.6 22/08/04 23/06/24 23/11/16 11.83 1444 2345 6.2 18/01/28 3.889 6 19/03/27 20/12/25 22/07/19 1041 1.3 23/10/24 25/05/22 15.13 903 3803 7.3 2001 SG286 18/03/24 3.553 0 19/04/14 20/05/21 22/03/22 1380 1.6 23/10/24 25/05/22 15.13 1195 2932 7.2 Venus Earth Mars 6th International Planetary Probe Workshop ; 21-06-2008 6 Baseline mission analysis
Launch by Soyuz-Fregat 2-1b from Kourou on direct escape (V = 3.49 km.s-1, Dec=0o) inf 10 months waiting September March 1566 kg launch mass 2019 period Æ 2018 October capability 2021 Total mission Arrival: December -1 ΔV ~ 1143 m.s 2020 Oct. 2021 Æ Re-entry velocity July 2022 = -1 September 9 months ~ 11.8 km.s 2017 science and sampling Mission duration 6.2 November operations years, incl. 1.6 years at 2023 NEO
June 2023 Departure: July 2022
6th International Planetary Probe Workshop ; 21-06-2008 7 Proximity operations
Both uncontrolled (for radio science) and controlled orbits have been analyzed assuming: • 1989 UQ physical properties (tumbling, 4:2:1 shape, ~ 760 m diameter, 7.7 h rotation, 1300 kg/m 3, etc. ) • Solar radiation pressure • Sun’s gravity influence (influence of planets’ negligible)
1 month
7 months
6th International Planetary Probe Workshop ; 21-06-2008 8 Sampling strategy, sample acquisition and transfer system
Possible strategies: • Hover & go • Touch & go • Short-term landing • Long-term landing 1m Rotating corer used as Image courtesy: JAXA sample vessel Mounted at the tip of telescopic boom Inserted into rotating corer holder (ERC backcover) further transferred Elevator to ERC via elevator Corer holder 20 N down-thrust during sampling operations Corer 20-30 minutes operations Telescopic Arm Æ Sampling Debris Smooth landing hatch Cover
6th International Planetary Probe Workshop ; 21-06-2008 9 Descent and landing
Navigation strategy (vision-based) • Get a good shape/gravity model and map hazards from orbit • Descent down to 150 m • “Go” decision Æ Autonomous + 90o slew
• Controlled descent (lateral) -1 • Landing conditions: VV < 20 cm.s , VH < 5 cm.s -1, θ < 10o • Landing accuracy < 5 m Æ safe site
• Autonomous battery-powered descent, landing, sampling and ascent operations ( ~ Image courtesy: Astrium Ltd 2 hours)
Landing structure/mechanism • Philae damping system or multistage crushable • Much higher clearance requirement • No anchoring
6th International Planetary Probe Workshop ; 21-06-2008 10 High-speed Earth re-entry
11.8 km.s-1, FPA~-12o Landing load on the sample: 800 g Peak heat flux: 11.3 MW.m-2 Heat load: 209 MJ.m-2 Entry duration: 484 s
Sample container
Rear TPS (Norcoat Liege) -3 Outer sphere PICA-like (260 kg.m ) front (FRP-Kevlar) Sample containment structure TPS, Norcoat-Liege rear TPS (FRP-Kevlar) 45o half-cone angle Shape foam 1.1 m base diameter Main structure (CFRP) 200 mm RVC foam Damping foam (RVC)
76 kg capsule Front TPS (PICA type carbon phenolic ablator) 6th International Planetary Probe Workshop ; 21-06-2008 11 Spacecraft design
Outbound Descent Sampling Earth Return Earth Re- propulsion Orbiter Module Module Vehicle entry Capsule Module
Body-mounted solar arrays (485 W) Low-thrust dual mode propulsion system 3-axis controlled 3 landing legs Central SATS accommodation Surface thermal control to be further analyzed Mass (i.e. keep sample Orbiter-lander dry mass incl. system margin 646 kg cold & high Orbiter-lander wet mass 1191 kg ERC 76 kg temperature Orbiter-lander propellant mass 545 kg mechanisms) Launch mass 1267 kg Launch mass incl. adapter 1312 kg Launch vehicle performance 1566 kg Below mass target by - 254 kg 6th International Planetary Probe Workshop ; 21-06-2008 12 Technology development ESA Marco Polo definition ESA Marco Polo assessment phase (phase A) phase (phase B1)
Marco Polo CDF study Marco Polo Industrial studies Marco Polo SATS development Ongoing SATS technology activities: Exomars drill, MSR sample transfer & Requirements manipulation Autonomous GNC technology for proximity operations around a NEO
Ongoing precision landing navigation activities: Don Quijote, MoonNEXT, MSR Development and manufacturing of a Previous-related ERC engineering model (incl. TPS), technology TPS material development, Re-entry Integrated impact attenuation activities: facility upgrade (incl. shock tube), Sample structure, etc. Aurora, Rosetta- container for MSR Philae, etc. Low-gravity/high-clearance landing Landing system development for MSR system MoU with Discussions with JAXA JAXA Objective: TRL5 !!! JAXA Marco Polo assessment phase
February March July Mid- Beginning- Mid- 2008 2008 2008 2009 2010 2011
6th International Planetary Probe Workshop ; 21-06-2008 13 Summary and way forward
ESA pre-phase A feasible mission design taking advantage of past/ongoing European technology development ESA industrial assessment studies (In // to JAXA study) • Kick-off: Sept. 08 • Conceptual Design: Sept. 08 – Dec. 08
• Selection of baseline design together with JAXA
• Detailed Mission Design: Jan. 09 - Jun. 09
• Programmatics data: Jul. 09
Æ Re-opened assessment (target, architecture, S/C design, etc.) to be iterated and
converged with JAXA Parallel instrument studies Planetary protection working group Set of technology activities defined and proposed + planned workshops/working Groups (e.g. Navigation around low-gravity bodies end of this year)
6th International Planetary Probe Workshop ; 21-06-2008 14